CFPB Bulletin 2021-03 on Consumer Reporting of Rental Information
CFPB Bulletin 2021-03: Consumer Reporting of Rental Information, 86 Fed. Reg.
CFPB Bulletin 2021-03: Consumer Reporting of Rental Information, 86 Fed. Reg.
CFPB Bulletin 2022-01: Medical Debt Collection and Consumer Reporting Requirements in Connection with the No Surprises Act, 87 Fed. Reg. 3025 (Jan.
The Seventh Circuit invited the CFPB to present an amicus brief in Preston v. Midland Credit Management. The issue presented deals with the fact that the FDCPA prohibits debt collectors from “using any language or symbol, other than the debt collector’s address, on any envelope when communicating with a consumer by use of the mails or by telegram, except that a debt collector may use his business name if such name does not indicate that he is in the debt collection business.” 15 U.S.C. § 1692f(8).
The FDCPA requires a debt collector, in certain situations, to “send the consumer a written notice containing” information about the debt and the consumer’s rights. 15 U.S.C. § 1692g(a). The question addressed in this amicus brief is: Whether the requirements of the E-SIGN Act, 15 U.S.C. § 7001-7006, apply when a debt collector wants to use an email to satisfy the written-notice requirement of § 1692g(a).
The CFPB amicus brief before the 11th Circuit in Wiley v. Notte & Kreyling, P.C.deals with advising consumers to dispute a debt with the creditor and not the collector. The FDCPA requires that debt collectors disclose the specific steps consumers must take to properly dispute a debt or request information about the original creditor.
This CFPB amicus brief before the Seventh Circuit in DeGroot v. Client Services deals with two questions. 1. Does a debt collector violate the FDCPA by accurately itemizing the interest and fees that are included in a debt it is seeking to collect, including when the interest and fees are $0.00? 2. Does a debt collector violate the FDCPA by accurately disclosing as part of a time-limited settlement offer that interest will not be charged
while the collector services the consumer’s account?
This CFPB Amicus Brief before the Seventh Circuit in Hopkins v. Collecto deals with whether a debt collector violate the FDCPA by accurately stating that the debt it is seeking to collect includes $0.00 in interest and collection fees, including when interest and collection fees are not currently accruing.
This notification letter from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid and the CFPB is directed to the attention of nursing facilities and debt collectors. It reminds them that the Nursing Home Reform Act (NHRA) prohibits nursing facilities from requesting or requiring that a third party personally guarantee payment to the facility as a condition of a resident’s admission or continued stay in the facility. Contract terms that conflict with the NHRA are unlawful, and alleged debts resulting from such unlawful contract terms are invalid and unenforceable.
CFPB Consumer Financial Protection Circular 2022-05 on deals with debt collection and consumer reporting practices involving invalid nursing home debts. Under the Nursing Home Reform Act, a nursing facility may not condition a resident’s admission or continued stay on receiving a guarantee of payment from a third party, such as a relative or friend. Contractual provisions that violate that prohibition are illegal and unenforceable.
Since 1999, Ronald Burdge, a Dayton Ohio consumer attorney, has been producing and publishing the free U.S. Consumer Law Attorney Fee Survey Report, the only national survey of consumer law practitioners in the United States. Its methodologies have been independently peer reviewed and supported by the National Association of Legal Fee Analysis.
This is a 2023 FDCPA complaint that pleads facts to support constitutional Article III standing in federal court. The complaint specifies concrete injury from an invasion of privacy and the time and expense of having his attorney send defendants a letter. The complaint was drafted by the Illinois firm of Philipps & Philipps and the Missouri firm of the Callahan Law Firm.
This is a 2023 FDCPA class class complaint dealing with a consumer disputing a debt and asking for verification. When the account was collected by a second agency, the consumer's requests were ignored and a new letter was sent. The complaint was drafted by the Illinois firms of Philipps & Philipps and SMITHMARCO.
This is a 2023 FDCPA complaint that takes care to plead facts to support constitutional Article III standing in federal court. The complaint specifies the plaintiff's concrete injury from an invasion of her privacy, seclusion, and the right to counsel; from her emotional distress; and from the cost to her of additional time, money, and effort to assert her rights. The complaint was drafted by the Illinois firm of Philipps & Philipps.
This CFPB advisory opinion, 88 Fed. Reg. 26475 (May 1, 2023) and effective May 1, 2023, explains that the FDCPA and Regulation F prohibit a debt collector from suing or threatening to sue to collect a time-barred debt. Accordingly, a debt collector who brings or threatens to bring a state court foreclosure action to collect a time barred mortgage debt may violate the FDCPA and Regulation F.
This CFPB blog explaining consumer rights when a debt collector contacts consumers regarding a zombie second mortgage.
This CFPB consumer education file explains to consumers what a zombie second mortgage is.